ACTION RESEARCH REPORT
RESEARCHING THE IMPACT OF EFFECTIVE COACHING AND MENTORING IN SCHOOLS 2 Action Research Report CONTENTS
Introduction...... 4 Polly Butterfield-Tracey and William Stow
The Value of Action Research and Teacher-led Enquiry Projects...... 5 Dr Peter Gregory
Finding Out More...... 6
Identifying a New Vulnerable Group: Students with a Fractured Education...... 7 Dr Clare Stubbs
Coaching and Its Importance to Middle Leaders ...... 11 Ros Krauspe
How is Coaching Effective in Middle Leaders?...... 14 Rachael Chapman
To What Extent Does Coaching Support the New Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development? ...... 15 Polly Butterfield-Tracey
Does Coaching Improve Teacher Mindset?...... 19 Becky Williams, Debra Lowther, Melita Brown, Glynn Myers
Does Coaching Improve Teacher Mindset? ...... 21 Becky Williams
What Does Effective Coaching Look Like at Dover Grammar School for Boys?...... 23 Dee Derrick, Catherine Gisby and Alan Smith
What Impact Does IRIS Connect Have on a Teacher’s Practice?...... 24 Debbie Chapman and Kirsty Adams
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 3 INTRODUCTION
This project was initiated as a result of reflection on the power of coaching and mentoring and its impact on the professional development of teachers and trainee teachers. The focus on coaching and mentoring coincided with the introduction of a coaching programme at Astor College, which has now become an integral part of our professional development. In discussion with Canterbury Christ Church University, we wanted to ask some systematic questions about this in practice in a number of schools. At Astor College we strive to build a learning community for teachers in every stage of their career, and ultimately the aim of the project was to develop a culture of self-evaluation and inquiry in which teachers learn collaboratively.
We are fortunate that Astor is a member of the Dover, Deal and Sandwich (DDS) partnership of schools, and through the DDS we have been able to work with a group of like-minded schools for the good of the teachers and students in our community. Twenty-four participants from across the district took part in the research project and by working alongside Canterbury Christ Church University we were able to formalise our research and publish our findings as presented here.
We hope that our energy and curiosity will encourage others to participate in similar school based research projects.
Polly Butterfield-Tracey (Associate Assistant Principal, Teaching and Learning, Astor College)
William Stow (Head of School, Teacher Education and Development, CCCU)
4 Action Research Report THE VALUE OF ACTION RESEARCH AND TEACHER-LED ENQUIRY PROJECTS
Booklets like these which seek to capture the essence of the learning engaged in by those that participate in a range of projects can sometimes be misleading. On first glance, it is easy to be attracted to look at what themes were explored across a range of school settings or perhaps the methods which were employed to complete the study.
I think that the deeper and rather bigger questions that we as readers should be asking ourselves are: • What was the value of undertaking these projects? • To the individual researchers? • To their schools? • To their pupils? • And even, over time beyond the life of the project?
It’s not possible to answer these questions in depth at the start of the booklet, but you might like to reflect on them as you start to consider the contents of the pages which lie ahead.
What can be done here, albeit briefly, is to begin to explore what has already been said about the value of such projects in general terms.
What is understood by ‘action research’? ‘Action research is a process of concurrently inquiring about problems and taking action to solve them. It is a sustained, intentional, recursive, and dynamic process of inquiry in which the teacher takes an action— purposefully and ethically in a specific classroom context— to improve teaching/learning. Action research is change research, a nonlinear, recursive, cyclical process of study designed to achieve concrete change in a specific situation, context, or work setting to improve teaching/learning…’ Pine, 2009: 29
In essence, the value of such projects lies in the person who engages. It is not the kind of work which is written about those who work outside the contextual situation in which it is undertaken. The drive comes from someone – in the pages which follow, teachers - who is captivated or intrigued by a particular set of circumstances, and moved to explore these in identifiable systematic, ethical and sceptical/critical ways. The drive is to both understand the situation better and also to make some changes, consider the impact they have made and ultimately pursue lasting improvement. The importance of the researcher within the actual context cannot be over- estimated and by committing to this form of study they are actually engaging in aspects of change of which they may have little awareness as they begin. As indicated in the following pages, individual teachers have read around the topics they have explored, engaged in dialogue with themselves and their peers as they have questioned, reasoned and pondered over possible pathways to take.
Why get involved in this process? This process of reflection-action-reflection-action can be considered as a spiralling cyclical process in which the research issues may change and actions undertaken are improved or discarded or become more focused. Action research assumes and celebrates that the teachers themselves are the agents and source of educational reform and not the objects of reform imposed by external agencies. Action research therefore empowers teachers to own their own professional knowledge. They are able to reflect on their practice to improve it, becoming more autonomous in their professional judgment, and able to develop a more energetic and dynamic environment where teaching and learning can take place. They also learn to articulate and build their knowledge, as well as recognise and appreciate their own expertise.
‘Teachers are privileged through the action research process to produce knowledge and consequently experience that “knowledge is power.” As knowledge and action are joined in changing practice, there is growing recognition of the power of teachers to change and reform education from the inside rather than having change and reform imposed top down from the outside.’ Pine, 2009: 31
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 5 Allowing teachers to explore their own area of interest is particularly empowering. Frost and Durrant (2002) commented on this approach as having a long term effect – not just on their behaviour -
‘but rather the impact of teachers’ development work on themselves and on their colleagues. The development of teachers’ leadership skills, the exponential growth of confidence and self-esteem and the release of creative energy have a powerful effect…’ Frost and Durrant, 2002:157
I believe that all of these elements are clearly identifiable through the range of projects described in the following pages. The voices which follow are those of the researchers who undertook the studies in their own schools. It was a great privilege to be involved in their learning journeys.
Dr Peter Gregory FRSA FCollT NLG Faculty Director of Partnership-led Action Research and Development
References Frost, D. and Durrant, J., (2002) Teachers as Leaders: exploring the impact of teacher-led development work. School leadership & management, 22(2), pp.143-161. Pine, G. (2009) ‘Teacher Action Research’ Chapter 2 in Teacher Action Research: Building Knowledge Democracies pp 29-61 London: Sage.
Finding out more Action Research projects If you, your school, Federation, Alliance or Multi Academy Trust would like to explore undertaking similar research activity, in the first instance please discuss your ideas with one of the team of Partnership Development Leaders (PDLs) at Canterbury Christ Church University. www.canterbury.ac.uk/education/pdls
A non-committed, informal discussion with the Faculty Director for Partner-led Action Research and Development would normally follow prior to agreeing a costed proposal and timeline.
Dr Peter Gregory can be contacted directly by email [email protected]
Potential accreditation of Action Research projects Further information on MA studies and registration with the Teaching and Learning Academy can be obtained from Linda Leith [email protected]
6 Action Research Report IDENTIFYING A NEW VULNERABLE GROUP: STUDENTS WITH A FRACTURED EDUCATION
Dr Clare Stubbs | Astor College | [email protected]
Since January 2016 I have run the Inclusion and Alternative Curriculum Centre at Astor College in Dover. Intergenerational unemployment coupled with instances of drug and alcohol use, and high separation rates among some parents mean that many of the students in our care don’t always have the most stable start in life. For some of our students, the behaviours that they experience outside of school impact on their own decision making, resilience and emotional wellbeing in school; escalating poor behaviour often follows and some students find themselves referred to Inclusion as a sanction or for “time out” as a result. In an effort to identify or predict which students were more likely to end up in Inclusion and prevent poor behaviour before it happened, I started collecting data on who was already being referred to my unit. While collecting this data, I noticed a pattern emerging: the students passing through Inclusion might belong to a known ‘vulnerable group’ (i.e. Pupil Premium, EAL or SEND) as I’d expected, but what I noticed was that a new group were emerging. This new group of children all had one thing in common: they had moved schools, sometimes frequently, and usually during KS1 or KS2. This led me to formulate the following question for my research:
To what extent does having a “fractured education” during KS1 and KS2 impact on behaviour in secondary school? Every term I collect and collate data about the students who are sent to Inclusion. Data includes gender, age, cohort, and whether the students belong to any vulnerable groups. The data is anonymized so that I can state the percentages of students that come from different groups in comparison to the percentages in main school. For example, in Term Three of 2016-2017 (i.e. January-February 2016), 79% of the children placed in Inclusion were Pupil Premium, compared to 46% Pupil Premium for the school as a whole. Similarly, at its highest, 33% of the Inclusion students were English as an Additional Language, whereas only 11% of main school were EAL.
Analysing this data enabled me to look for ‘spikes’ and ask questions like “Why are Pupil Premium and EAL over- represented?” or “Why are Yr11 dominant in Term Five?” or “Why do we see more boys than girls in Yr8, but more girls than boys from Yr9?”
My rationale for asking these “Why?” questions and using data in this way is because I want to be able to identify groups who are statistically more likely to come to Inclusion for poor behaviour. These target groups could then be supported before poor behaviour escalates; my team could be used to prevent rather than react to issues. For example, by identifying Pupil Premium as an over-represented group, my team and I worked specifically with these students to find out what support the students need in order to prevent poor behaviours. As a result, Pupil Premium figures for Inclusion dropped from 79% to 38% between January 2016 and July 2017 (compared to 46% for the school as a whole). Similarly, between Term 5 2016 and Term 5 2017, numbers of EAL dropped from 33% to 17% (compared to 11% of the whole school).
As well as looking at ages, cohorts and known vulnerable groups, I noticed from general conversations with the students that some had come to Astor College from the same couple of feeder schools. I started thinking about the possibility of outreach and working collaboratively with feeder schools so behaviour strategies and expectations at secondary school level were instilled in students before they joined KS3. Another column was added to my data collection tables: feeder school. This was populated using the school history data in SIMS as well as asking students what schools they had gone to.
It soon became clear that my “feeder school” column needed to be labelled “feeder schools” (plural). High numbers of the students in Inclusion had not enjoyed the stability of attending just one primary or primary school. In the case of some of our EAL students they had not only moved schools but moved countries, and one boy had never attended any school before coming to Astor. Other students were Children in Care and had moved from out of county. Others had never left Kent, but had moved around a lot within the county. Some students had stayed within the catchment area but moved from one primary school to another and back again. The individual stories were different, but all these students had one thing in common: they had experienced what I call a “Fractured Primary Education”.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 7 What the Data Revealed: From January 2016 to December 2016 inclusively, 154 individuals were placed in Inclusion of whom 42% (65 individuals) had a fractured education. Similarly, from January 2017 until May 2017 inclusively, 95 individual students were placed in Inclusion. These students represented 18 different feeder schools. 19% of the 95 Inclusion students came from the same feeder school, which was consistent with the numbers for the whole school. The other feeder schools fielded very low numbers of Inclusion students. However, 43 of the 95 students, which is 45%, had a fractured education.
To put that into perspective, the average number of Pupil Premium students in Inclusion was 57%; the average percentage of EAL students was 25%. The average percentage of Fractured Education students was 43%. The data strongly suggested that students with a fractured education were the second group most likely to behave in extreme ways and end up being internally excluded. They were, then, a group in need of extra support.
But how did this compare to the school as a whole?
Finding ‘Control Groups’ I randomly selected and looked at an ‘average’ Yr9 tutor group. 23% of the students in this tutor group had been to more than one primary school. Every one of the students with a fractured primary education was known to me because they had been to Inclusion at some point. Perhaps significantly the student who I saw the most had the most number of school moves and had also moved from out of county. Superficially at least, there seemed to be a correlation between number of moves and distance travelled and seriousness/frequency of behavioural incidents.
I randomly selected another tutor group, this time a Yr11 class. In this group no students had experienced a fractured primary education. No members of this tutor group had been placed in Inclusion. This seemed to confirm the link between a fractured education and behavioural issues.
My Own Experience and a Learning Epiphany I had a very powerful learning epiphany or realisation, which brought up a lot of ‘stuff’ for me. Once this connection between poor behaviour and moving schools was in my awareness, I couldn’t believe that I’d not thought about it before because it had happened to me.
When I was nine, my dad was made redundant. My hitherto happy parents faced a year of financial uncertainty, dole queues and increasingly heated arguments fuelled by anxiety and alcohol. This went on for a year while my dad sought a new job. One thing remained constant for me: going to school. My friends and I played cards with our favourite dinner lady every lunchtime and I was very attached to my teacher, who we’d had all day, every day for two years. I probably spent more waking time with my teacher each week than at home with my parents. This continuity and stability was really important to me and school gave me a safe place to be.
We were all really excited and relieved when my dad got a new job. But there was a bombshell. We had to move house. I had to move schools.
We moved in the summer so I could finish Yr5 at my primary school, but I was so upset in the last term that I became selectively mute around the people I didn’t want to leave. I couldn’t bring myself to talk about what was happening, instead I started writing my dinner lady notes because if I talked I’d cry. I deliberately fell out with my friend so I could be in control of not seeing her any more. As I started Yr6 in my new school my behaviour changed radically. I over-ate and got fat. I started feigning illness in order to avoid going to school and my attendance dropped from 100% to less than 50%. On the days I would go into class I either cried over nothing or I did things to get sympathy like put a massive plaster on a paper cut, and make a fuss about it. At home I started to get rude and argumentative. I was very angry. Towards the end of Yr6, just as I started to settle, it was time to leave and go to a comprehensive school. My behaviour at school was indifferent (although I did tear up an exercise book because I didn’t want to do an essay), but outside of school I remained angry and defiant, and my attendance did not get any better.
All these behaviours, the attention seeking, the truancy, the arguing, the rudeness to adults, the anger, these were all similar behaviours to those that typically landed the students I now work with in Inclusion. And, like me, my data indicated that high percentages of the Inclusion students had moved schools.
Another learning epiphany followed: if that was how I responded, as a literate child from a normally stable and supportive family, is it any wonder that many of the children we see in Inclusion develop more extreme, risk taking
8 Action Research Report behaviours as well? My house move and school move were relatively straight forward and although it seemed like miles at the time, in reality we only moved twelve miles away. How would it feel to have moved to another county, or another country? Or to leave a parent behind? And what if moving schools and houses was borne of a messy divorce, moonlight flit, domestic abuse or bereavement, or being taken into care?
Student Voice I knew how I’d felt as a student many years ago, but what about the students in my care in the present? My data suggested I was probably onto something, and from my own experience as a child I knew how moving schools could impact on behaviour. I therefore wanted to ask some of the ‘fractured’ inclusion students that I had with me what their thoughts were around being moved and the impact on behaviour. I considered surveys and multiple choice questions as a means of collecting their thoughts, but these methods seemed a bit ‘cold’. Also, I didn’t want to present students with possibly distressing questions on an inhumane piece of paper. As well as being a teacher I am a qualified counsellor, and it felt more appropriate to simply talk to the students.
Yr10 and Yr11 were over-represented cohorts within my ‘fractured’ target group so I started by talking to them. I’d built good working relationships with these students so I felt able to ask what could be sensitive questions in an appropriate way. I also felt that if any of the students got upset I would be able to use my counselling skills to listen to them and give them the space to explore those feelings.
Conversations with the students were carried out individually, except for two boys who were particular friends and wanted to talk to me together. I started by explaining that confidentiality and anonymity would be observed, unless the student disclosed a safeguarding issue. I then told the students what my data suggested and asked them whether, as children who had moved schools themselves, they thought there was anything in my research. Did they feel that moving schools affected behaviour later on? I let the conversation grow from there with the student leading. Here is a representative selection of some of the students’ comments:
• “There’s no point in sticking with anything ‘cos you just get moved again.” • “I started learning about one thing and then I was moved to a school where they didn’t do that so I looked well stupid.” • “I started mucking around because I didn’t understand the way they did Maths in my new school.” • “I didn’t want to make friends with anyone in case we moved on again, so I did things to be horrible. I didn’t like leaving my friends the first time so I didn’t want to make new friends.” • “I was annoyed with my mum ‘cos we moved, so I was getting into trouble at school so she’d have to keep going in to speak to my teachers. She had to take time off to do this and she was worried she’d lose her job. I thought if I could make her lose her job we could go back again.” • “Just as I was getting into my new school and getting to know everybody, like, we moved again and I had to start over again so I don’t bother making any effort now. I just mess around ‘cos I get bored.”
The children interviewed so far were more articulate and self-aware than I had assumed they would be, given their attainment and behaviour in main school. With hindsight they understood why they behaved in the way that they did, and seemed open to talking about and sharing their stories. They were also genuinely interested in my research and several said they liked the idea of their experiences being used in a project that could help future students. I also felt excited – what if we could use my data to support this group of students and reduce instances of their poor behaviour and referrals to Inclusion, as we had already done with Pupil Premium and EAL?
Going Forwards This study is in its infancy. My investigation and data collection has only been going on for 18 months. The next steps will be: 1. Collecting data over a longer period (certainly three or even five years) so that I can be certain the trends I am seeing are real and not just peculiar to the current cohorts. 2. Sharing my data and findings with colleagues in other schools. For example, we have links with a military boarding school, and since they deal with army families, their students have typically moved around Britain or Europe frequently. I want to see how their Inclusion data compares to mine. 3. Moving schools could be the symptom of a greater underlying trauma and behaviour might be a form of defence against complex loss and grief. I would therefore like to explore the reasons for the children moving schools. For example, did a parent have to do a ‘moonlight flit’ because of debt? Was mum abused and moved to a hostel out of town with the children? Did a bereavement force an upheaval? Did parents divorce? Did a Child in Care’s placement break down? If the move was borne of a traumatic event, using fractured education data might be a good way to identify children in need to counselling or other therapeutic intervention.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 9 4. I want to revisit and deepen my understanding of Bowlby and Attachment issues in order to understand how attachment, or more specifically breaking an attachment (to a parent/carer, a location or to favourite teachers) might lead to future attachment styles that affect behaviours. A lot of research has been done into attachment between infants and mothers, but I’d like to find out about attachment in childhood and prepubescent students. 5. In my capacity as a member of the advisory board for an infant school in our catchment area, I want to find ways to educate parents so they understand the effects of moving children.
I began by saying that not all of the students at Astor enjoyed the most stable start in life, although at the start of my data collection I did not anticipate finding what I found. My accidental discovery was that high numbers of the students in Inclusion had moved primary schools at some point. This lead to the question ‘To what extent does having a “fractured education” during KS1/KS2 impact on behaviour in secondary school?’
At this stage the data strongly suggests that moving schools in KS1 and/or KS2 has a significant impact on later behaviour. To recap, in 2016, 42% of the students referred to Inclusion had previously moved schools. During 2017, 45% of the students in Inclusion had moved schools at some point. This made the ‘fractured education’ group the second highest represented group in Inclusion (second only to Pupil Premium), and when compared to an ‘average’ form group the relationship between behaviour and moving schools was evident. I would argue that students with a fractured education are a vulnerable group in need of support to prevent inappropriate behaviours and referrals to exclusion units. Furthermore, school history data could be used to identify students who might have underlying compound grief or other trauma, and need therapeutic intervention before inappropriate behaviours escalate. A lot more data needs to be collected and a lot more research needs to be done, particularly into behaviours rooted in attachment and loss. However, based on my initial findings I would like to see school history data being used to identify students who fall into this vulnerable group with a view to offering them support that helps prevent poor behaviour borne of disruption. Eventually I would like to see parents being educated about the effects of moving children with a view to unnecessary moves being avoided, and students being allowed a more stable start in life.
Reference Ofsted (2002) Managing Pupil Mobility. London: Ofsted. Available at http://dera.ioe.ac.uk/4527/1/Managing%20 pupil%20mobility%20%28PDF%20format%29.pdf [Accessed November 2017]
10 Action Research Report COACHING AND ITS IMPORTANCE TO MIDDLE LEADERS
Ros Krauspe | Astor College| [email protected]
Middle leaders need support regardless of age or experience as there is a gap that needs filling between “teacher” and “leader”. I therefore wondered if effective coaching could fill this gap.
The original idea was to interview a number of new middle leaders within our school – some of whom had had coaching, some were coaches without coaching; some had not had any coaching at all. It became evident that this study was too big to undertake given the time constraints so I decided to analyse myself and produce a personal reflection of the impact that coaching had had on my development as a middle leader.
How important is coaching to the development of Middle Leaders? A Personal Account September 2016 brought with it a new challenge to the start of the school year. I had a clear vision as to what I wanted to achieve and thought I knew exactly how I was to go about putting my plans into action. After 20 years of teaching experience I felt confident in my ability to lead my newly acquired department and ultimately prove to myself that I had what it takes to be a successful middle leader. I had been waiting patiently in the wings for this opportunity for a very long time and was determined to make a success of it.
The first term did not go entirely as planned. My plans were implemented and some went down better than others with the department. It became clear early on that no amount of self-belief, planning or forward thinking was enough to prepare me to deal with the dynamics of being a middle leader.
The senior leadership team had clear directives for middle leaders that needed to be implemented in order for them to achieve their targets, driven by the ever present pressure of changing government policy, the squeeze on the budget and the looming Ofsted inspection. My evenings became a blur of department development plans, the department calendar clearly mapping out step by step how I planned to lead my team to complete the Y11 syllabus by the Easter holidays and how I planned to encourage the raising of standards and aspirations within my department. I kept thinking about my own teaching, how was I going to lead by example? How was I going to raise the standards in my own classroom and what was I going to change to ensure I was challenging my students to reach their full academic potential?
With each passing meeting, of which there were many, each observation of my department, each RAG of their live data files, analysis of data both of my own classes and those of the department, 4Matrix, SIMS, BTEC paperwork, OCR deadlines and the constant pressure to remain positive despite the growing need for me to stay at school until 5pm most afternoons and then sitting up until past midnight most evenings to get my marking done because PPA time no longer existed, leading by example seemed impossible. I was definitely not implementing the policy of work-life balance and had no idea how I was going improve the situation.
By the end of the first term I was exhausted, my family had hardly seen me and I felt like a fraud. I didn’t have the tools required to be a successful middle leader, my classroom experience wasn’t enough on its own and my previous leadership experience was 10 years prior in a different country, different culture with different demands. I was ill prepared and felt as if was always one step behind.
I had to change, change the way I was thinking, change the way I was teaching and change the way I was leading my department. I was in a manic state that was unsustainable.
At the end of the previous school year I had put my name forward for the Middle Leadership course and the Action Research project. As term 2 started, moderation, exams and more meeting were the order of the day. The courses were due to start and I no longer had a master plan, my toolbox was empty and I needed tools quickly. Middle Leadership was a good start, it highlighted my responsibilities, it was an hour and a half of listening to my peers in the same situation as me, to hear their solutions to problems, how they approached the growing demands made on their time and how they were dealing with the range of personalities within their departments successfully. Action Research on the other hand was a breath of fresh air; it felt incredible to stretch my brain and to think of things other than GCSE coursework. The problem I had was that I had no idea what Coaching was, I had heard the term used around the staffroom along with other phrases such as ‘boxing the chimp’. There seemed to be a club for those who were in the know, they seemed calmer and lacked the crazed look that haunted the rest of us. I wanted, needed, to join the Coaching Club.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 11 Term 3 and my first coaching sessions were soon to begin. Filling in the pre-coaching questionnaire I had a sense of anticipation but still had no real idea what to expect or what the benefits would ultimately be. I planned to meet my coach before school every second Thursday and would do so until the end of term 4: 6 sessions in total.
Coaching has been a turning point in my year. The concept is simple; you meet with your coach, a peer; they know the unique pressures and demands within your school, this puts you on common ground, meaning you can quickly move on to discussing issues relevant to your particular situation. Coaches do not provide you with answers; they simply and effectively provide you with the tools necessary to devise your own solutions to a problem or situation. Meeting every second week gives you the time to implement these tools, challenge yourself and perhaps push yourself out of your comfort zone. Meeting again to discuss and reflect on the outcome of the previous 2 weeks is liberating. Being able to share how thing went well and celebrating progress is very powerful and motivates you to want to try new strategies.
When strategies do not go quiet as planned, it is encouraging to discuss what went wrong without being judged and to be presented with new strategies to try. I feel far more in control of my new role as a middle leader now that I have a bank of tool to draw on. The most powerful tool for me has been the sphere of influence. Learning to identify what I can control and influence and putting to one side those things which are out of my control has reduced my stress level considerably, it has also provided me with the confidence to trust my department and to rely on their professional judgement so that we can move forward together, sharing the work load and ultimately celebrating success.
My Coaching sessions have now come to an end, however my development as a middle leader has only just began. I am excited by the prospect of future CPD, reading on the latest educational research, implementing new strategies within my own teaching to raise students aspirations, provide them with challenges and ultimately encourage them to love learning.
I would recommend Coaching to all new middle leaders regardless of their age or previous experience. Coaching bridges the gap between being a classroom teacher and a middle leader. It requires a paradigm shift in your way of thinking and dealing with situations that can be uncomfortable and at times make you feel vulnerable, however Coaching provides you with the tools and confidence to move forward and to take your department and students with you.
My research question How important is coaching to the development of Middle Leaders?
Method(s) As a new Middle Leader, I analysed myself in the role before and after coaching. Qualitative research – has helped me gain an understanding of underlying reasons, opinions and motivations about coaching and its impact. It has provided me with an insight into the problem I had identified and has helped me develop ideas or hypotheses.
Review from my coach: At the start of Term 3 I was given the opportunity to coach RK. We had approximately 5 coaching sessions together and the whole process I feel was a huge success. RK was very coachable, was open to new strategies, worked on the actions set, reflected on the conversations and was eager to explore more as we progressed through the sessions. As a coach I feel I have gained a lot from the experience, my confidence as a coach developed and I thoroughly enjoyed being part of the journey.
I have seen a huge change in RK, I feel the best way to describe the change is that she has her hunger for the job back, she is involved in professional dialogue again, is challenging herself and has been given the space to realise that she deserves this role and has freedom to take this role wherever she wishes’ . I feel RK would make a fantastic coach herself.
Quantitative research – Questionnaires / before and after comparisons. Bias – my data has an element of bias as I have used myself as the subject.
12 Action Research Report What did you learn? By identifying that the skills required as a class teacher are different from those required as a middle leader it provided me with an insight that knowledge, experience and skills are not automatically transferable. From my experience I found that coaching supports a paradigm shift in the way thinking and problem solving takes place, ultimately leading to the successful management of people in order to achieve the ever changing and challenging targets expected by Senior Management, in a positive manner.
Next steps Hopefully from my feedback Senior Management will continue to see the value of coaching to middle leaders by allocating the necessary resources. I will be completing the “Coaching” course in August and I hope that through my experience of being coached and by completing the Action Research project I will be able to have a positive impact on others, providing them with the tools that have become so valuable to me.
Further enquiry could be a study of middle leaders who have been coached and those who have not.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 13 HOW IS COACHING EFFECTIVE IN MIDDLE LEADERS?
Rachael Chapman | Astor College | [email protected]
I wanted to see how coaching could be used in the facilitation and training process for new middle leaders ensuring their success in their new role.
I used my own personal experience as a middle leader first of all, having only the coaching training and not being coached. Then I looked at how a new middle leader who was coached had a more positive experience and was able to develop skills. I then had the coaching myself during the latter part of the year and found how my skills of coaching were not as easily transferable into being coached, yet I was more accomplished after having the coaching.
My research has shown that the coaching model within our college is extremely effective and inspirational for many professionals. I have found that my skills as a coach are now more refined and I can explore with a coachee how to strategize and assist them on their route to solutions. My professional practice has greatly improved with the continued coaching I have received and I feel more of an effective and inspirational leader.
14 Action Research Report TO WHAT EXTENT DOES COACHING SUPPORT THE NEW STANDARD FOR TEACHERS’ PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT?
Polly Butterfield-Tracey | Astor College | [email protected]
This investigation was submitted as a negotiated module as part of an MA at Canterbury Christ Church University.
The publication of the Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development by the Department for Education (DfE, 2016a) outlines several expectations about professional development stating that teachers need professional development that is relevant to their practice and which has significant impact on pupil achievement. The document sets out recommendations and guidance for the implementation of the Standard by school leaders, teachers and professional development organisations.
The Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development is set out in five parts:
1. Professional development should have a focus on improving and evaluating pupiloutcomes. 2. Professional development should be underpinned by robust evidence and expertise. 3. Professional development should include collaboration and expert challenge. 4. Professional development programmes should be sustained over time. 5. Professional development must be prioritised by school leadership
Coaching shares many of the characteristics underpinning the recommendations made in the Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development (DfE, 2016a), including sustainability (p. 10) and collaboration (p. 9), and is mentioned explicitly in Part 3 which states that effective professional development should include “support from someone in a coaching role to provide modelling and challenge” (p. 9). However, the way in which coaching could support other parts of the Standard is more complex and worthy of discussion. For example, Part 1 recommends that professional development should involve evaluation of how the activity is “having an impact on pupil outcomes” (p. 7). Aligning effective professional development with improved pupil outcomes raises some interesting questions, especially in relation to a professional development activity such as coaching which, while meeting the desired criteria for “collaboration” (p. 9) and “opportunities for reflections, feedback and evaluation” (P. 10), does not easily lend itself to being measured.
As a workplace coach and leader of professional development in my setting I have considered how well a coaching model could support the Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development (DfE, 2016a). My enquiry will focuses on the potential for coaching to be a collaborative and sustainable professional development activity, and the extent to which the success of coaching can be measured through an increase in pupil outcomes.
Coaching as a collaborative and sustainable professional development activity The aim of professional development is to find methods to facilitate teachers to develop their practice, and therefore bring about improvements in pupil learning and outcomes. The challenge is how to manage and sustain this type of development in schools when time and financial constraints caused by funding cuts are a daily reality (Weston, 2014), and over half of schools report it harder to give teachers the professional development they need because of financial pressures (Teacher Development Trust, 2014). Because of these pressures, professional development has increasingly moved towards whole school approaches (McAlpine et al, 1998; Willis; 2000), including sustainable activities such as coaching, which encourages collaboration between professionals (Lofthouse et al., 2010). The work by Hawk and Hill (2003) has shown that coaching programmes in schools can indeed enable aspects of professional development to be integrated to maximise resources and time, as well as setting up the experience and expertise to sustain development through collaboration.
A theme that emerges from research into collaborative professional development is that it is rated highly by teachers and leaders when the opportunity to undertake it is provided (Lofthouse et al., 2010:10). But there can be challenges involved in bringing about a shift in the way teachers think about professional development that is required to encourage collaboration between professionals (Hawk and Hill, 2003). In schools where the professional development culture already includes strong teacher collaboration the adoption of collaborative activities such as coaching present fewer problems (Harris, 2001). But in schools where this is not prevalent there is evidence that coaching can also be used as a driver of change, to assist with embedding a culture of self-evaluation and inquiry in which teachers can learn collaboratively (Lofthouse et al., 2010:3).
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 15 The Evidence for Policy and Practice Co-ordinating Centre (EPPI) has conducted research in to the impact of collaborative professional development on teaching and learning (Cordingley et al. 2003). The main findings included an increased enthusiasm for collaborative activities and a greater commitment to changing practice and the desire to try new things. Collaborative activities also helped to break down initial teacher anxieties around being observed, and increased relational trust between professionals. The characteristics of collaborative professional development outlined by Lofthouse et al. (2010) map strongly onto models of coaching including a focus on peer support, developing and structure professional dialogue, and sustaining professional development over time to enable practitioners to embed changes in to their own teaching (p. 11).
Eraut has stressed the importance of confidence in mid-career professional learning, which arises from successfully meeting challenges and from feeling supported (2007). The development of collaborative professional development activities in schools can go a considerable way towards increasing the confidence of mid-career professionals, especially through the personalised, situated learning that coaching can provide. Although much attention is paid to the support of the trainee teacher (Hayes, 2000) mid-career teachers are often not equally supported in their careers (Harrison, 2001). This is view supported by later research by Dymoke and Harrison (2006), who state that school systems often do not support teachers to become critically reflective practitioners as professional development is so closely aligned with performance management mechanisms which do not develop career aspirations and teachers’ professional practice.
Measuring the success of coaching through an increase in pupil outcomes The Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development (DfE, 2016a) makes the distinction between direct professional development and indirect professional development. Direct seeks to directly improve practice and pupil outcomes whereas indirect may improve, for example, the running of the school or offer support around organisational initiatives. Coaching fits most comfortably in to the indirect category as a significant professional learning strategy supporting professional growth, and addressing a range of developmental needs that contribute to the effectiveness of a teacher. Part 1 of the Standard states that “Professional development should have a clear focus on improving and evaluating pupil outcomes” (DfE, 2016a:7) but as an indirect form of professional development, coaching affects pupil outcomes less clearly than more direct forms. This is compounded by the frequent lack of any formal evaluation processes on the impact of coaching on pupil outcomes, and it is extremely difficult to find research which analyses the effect of coaching in schools in this country. In addition, there is little evidence of how coaching processes are being managed as they can easily become entangled in thinking about performance management (Simkins, et al., 2006). The result is a challenge in justifying the allocation of resources to a form of professional development that cannot easily be measured, especially in a time of real terms funding cuts in schools (Weston, 2014).
The difficulty in measuring the impact of coaching as a form of professional development frequently raises the discussion around coaching being aligned to the performance management of teachers, and there is a large amount of pressure on those responsible for professional development to be able to provide impact evidence though increased pupil outcomes (Hawk and Hill, 2003). There are clear advantages if this is possible, although in complex institutions such as schools the ability to isolate certain initiatives and variables is seldom possible. Because coaching programmes often focus on altering teacher attitude and practice in order that pupils will open themselves up to and improve their learning, it is not often feasible to use pupil achievement data to evaluate programmes. As a result, data tends to be mostly qualitative and focused on what changes teachers are aware they have made and what changes coaches have observed (Grossek, 2008). However, this type of data can be highly valid since the coaches are well equipped to make professional judgements.
The work by Joyce & Showers (1998) and Oldroyd & Hall (1998) has shown that engagement of coaching assists the translation into increased impact on job performance, and Eraut has argued that frameworks for critical and reflective dialogue improve performance (2000). However, any performance management mechanism has the potential to undermine the principals of coaching. Schools in which coaching is successful regard the process as a developmental and confidential where the coach and coachee are the only people to access related records because their purpose is entirely formative (Hawk and Hill, 2003). Effective coaching is non-judgmental and based on forming a relationship of equals (Hart, 2003) and aligning coaching and teacher performance can create some dangerous consequences. Implications of status and power relationships are particularly pertinent as increasingly coaching is being seen within education as a means of assisting the raising of standards (Rhodes & Beneicke, 2003). However this evidently creates a clash of cultures as coaching is most successful when it is a separate mechanism from performance management and the work by Lofthouse et al (2010) has shown that there is considerable resistance from teachers to coaching becoming a managerial process. Part of the benefit of coaching is that it is a voluntary, non-judgmental process free from many of the power relations of the trainee-mentor, which must be carried out within a safe professional development culture (Hargreaves and Dawe, 1990) to enable
16 Action Research Report development to be ongoing. This is a view reinforced in later work by Fullan and Hargreaves who urge caution concerning performance management and professional development models (1996).
In addition, the supporting letter from the Teachers’ Professional Development Expert Group published alongside the Standard for Teachers’ Professional development (DfE, 2016a) stressed that performance management is not core to professional development, stating “our view is that a change to the model appraisal policy without a fundamental improvement in understanding of teacher development could be more harmful than helpful at this stage” (DfE, 2016b:3). The implications are far-reaching as the process of performance management potentially changes the relationship between teachers, and encourages a culture of competitiveness in which teachers are required to stand out from each other (Elliott, 2001). This could negatively impact the ability for schools to develop the required culture for collaborative learning to thrive.
Coaching, when practiced well, can offer schools a personalised and sustainable method of professional development which supports many of the requirements set out in the Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development (DfE, 2016a), such as collaboration and sustainability (p. 6). However, as a professional development activity that does not lend itself to be measured the lack of quantitative data to support coaching programmes can result in a challenge in justifying the allocation of the required resources. Although with the current focus on measurable outcomes in schools there could be clear advantages to aligning coaching to pupil outcomes, the complex nature of institutions such as schools mean this is seldom possible. Schools should instead focus on useful data such as what changes teachers are aware they have made and what changes coaches have observed. This data could then provide a structured framework for analytical and reflective deliberation (Lofthouse et al., 2010:3).
Coaching in schools can be used as a driver of change to enhance professional development, embed change and facilitate the transmission of teacher learning in to student learning within the school environment. However, for coaching to be effective, like all collaborative activities, it must be done within a safe professional development culture, separate from performance related mechanisms. Schools should consider adopting coaching to enhance professional development and support the Standard for Teachers’ Professional Development (DfE, 2016a) while resisting the temptation to align it with the performance management of teachers.
References Cordingley, P., Bell, M., Rundell, B. & Evans, D. (2003) The Impact of collaborative Professional Development on classroom teaching and learning. London: EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.
DfE (2016a) Standards for Teachers’ Professional Development . London: Stationery Office
DfE (2016b) Letter from the Teachers’ Professional Development Expert Group [Online] Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/537035/160712_-_Letter_from_ Expert_Group.professional development f [Accessed 20th January 2017]
Dymoke, S. & Harrison, S. (2006) Professional development and the beginning of teachers: issues of teacher autonomy and institutional conformity in the performance review process, Journal of Education for Teaching, Vol. 32 (1), pp. 71-92.
Elliott, J. (2001). Characteristics of performative cultures their central paradoxes and limitations as resources of educational reform, In Gleeson, D. & Husbands, C. (eds.) The performing school. London: Routledge Falmer pp. 192-209
Eraut, M. (2000) Development of knowledge and skills at work, in F. Coffield (Ed.) Differing visions of a learning society, Vol. 1. Bristol: The Policy Press
Eraut, M. (2007) Learning from other people in the workplace, Oxford Review of Education, Vol. 33 (4), pp. 403- 422.
Fullan, M. & Hargreaves, A. (1996) What’s worth fighting for in your school? New York: Teachers’ College Press
Grossek, H. (2008) To What Extent Does Coaching Contribute to the Professional development of Teachers. Research project completed under the auspices of the DEECD School Research Grants Program. Victoria, Australia. Available at: http://ihexcellence.org/doc/hrossek_prodev.doc [Accessed 20th January 2017]
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 17 Hargreaves, A. & Dawe, R. (1990) Paths of Professional development : Contrived Congeniality, Collaborative Culture, and the Case of Peer Coaching, Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 6, pp.227-241
Harris, A. (2001) Building the Capacity for School Improvement. School Leadership and Management, 21(3):pp.261- 270
Harrison, R. (2001) A Strategy for Professional development , Professional development Today, Summer, pp. 9-20
Hart, E. (2003) Developing a coaching culture. Center for Creative Leadership 858: 638-8053.
Hawk, K. & Hill, J. (2003) Coaching teachers: Effective professional development but difficult to achieve. Paper presented at AARE/NZARE Conference, Auckland, December 2003. Available at: https://pdfs.semanticscholar. org/9f26/e0cf0fe2a0bda4b45a2f9665827576e9485b.pdf [Accessed 20th January 2017]
Hayes, D. (2000) The Handbook for Newly Qualified Teachers: meeting the standards in primary and middle schools. London: David Fulton Publishers.
Joyce, B. & Showers, B. (1998) Student Achievement Through Staff Development, New York: Longman.
Lofthouse, R., Cummings, C., Hall, E., Leat, D. & Towler, C. (2010) Improving Coaching: Evolution not revolution, Reading: CfBT Education Trust and the National College.
McAlpine, D,. Poskitt, J. and Bourke, R. (1996) Assessment for better learning. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education
Oldroyd, D. & Hall, V. (1998) Managing Professional development and Inset: a handbook for schools and colleges. Bristol: NDCSMT, Bristol University School of Education
Rhodes, C. & Beneicke, S. (2003) Professional development support for poorly performing teachers: challenges and opportunities for school managers in addressing teacher learning needs, Journal of In-service Education, Vol. 29, pp.123-140
Simkins, T., Coldwell, M., Cailau, I., Finlayson, H. & Morgan, A. (2006) Coaching as an in-school leadership development strategy: Experiences from Leading from the Middle, Journal of In-Service Education, Vol. 32, pp. 321- 340
Teacher Development Trust (2014) Teacher Development Trust Annual Report 2014 [Online] Available at: http:// tdtrust.org/teacher-development-trust-annual-report-2014-2 [Accessed 2nd March 2017]
Weston, D. (2014) Schools cutting staff development amid cash pressures [Online] Available at: https://www. theguardian.com/teacher-network/teacher-blog/2014/jun/30/school-professional-development-budget-cut [Accessed 12 February 2017]
Willis, S. (2000). Adult learning and the professional development of teachers. Paper prepared for the Education Review Office. Wellington: Victoria [Online] Available at: http://appi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Default. aspx?tabid=133&language=en-US [Accessed 22 January 2017]
18 Action Research Report DOES COACHING IMPROVE TEACHER MINDSET?
Becky Williams, Debra Lowther, Melita Brown, Glynn Myers | Goodwin Academy [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Over the last few years, Carol Dweck’s work on Growth Mindset (2012) has gained significant attention in schools. By encouraging cultures to develop which allow mistakes to be celebrated as learning opportunities, schools are attempting to ensure that children develop the requisite belief system to progress continuously.
However, as a research team, we were interested in the idea of the mindset of our teachers. After all, if teachers don’t share the same feelings about themselves and their ability to improve and solve problems as they arise, could they really support the development of this environment in their students?
We were especially interested to investigate whether or not coaching has any impact on a teacher’s mindset. We wanted to explore the possibility that with short, focussed conversations, teachers would feel more able to solve successfully the dynamic problems presented in a classroom.
Our research question: “Does coaching improve teacher mindset?” As a research team, we each approached two members of staff. One of these members of staff would have a regular coaching conversation with us, and the other would receive no other interaction from us at all.
At the start of the process, all participants completed the Growth Mindset questionnaire developed by Carol Dweck and her team. At the end of a six week period, all completed the same questionnaire in order to assess whether or not coaching had any impact on their mindset.
As a team we also elected to use a particular model for our coaching interactions. The WOOP model (Wish, Outcome, Obstacle, Plan) is developed by Character Lab for use in schools, and we chose this because it also comes with a script for the coaches to use, keeping the conversations structured and focussed, as well as ensuring all participants had the same interactions with their coaches. As the emphasis was on the impact of coaching rather than a particular coach, we felt that this would yield the most controlled results.
In the first participant pairing, the participant with no coaching interaction improved their Growth Mindset score by one point over the six week period. Overall, they remained in a Mixed Mindset, unsure of their capacity to improve in all aspects of their intelligence and abilities. However, the participant who was coached achieved a much greater increase in their Mindset score, moving from a Mixed Mindset to a more Growth Mindset, believing that their ability to meet the challenges that they felt were causing them difficulties could be developed.
In the second participant pairing, the participant with no coaching interaction showed no improvement in their Growth Mindset Score over the 6-week period. The participant with no coaching interaction found it particularly difficult to reflect or improve in all aspects of their intelligence and abilities without support. However, the participant who was coached did demonstrate a move of 2 levels in the assessment towards that of a Growth Mindset. Through discussions with the participant, it was clear that they had felt greater success and achieved better outcomes from the areas they identified as preventing them from developing.
The participant without the WOOP model of coaching in the third participant pairing, when asked to revisit the Growth Mindset questionnaire, achieved a score that only moved by two marks. In comparison the participant that was coached weekly using the WOOP model as a coaching structure the review of the Growth Mindset questionnaire increased considerably by 8 points. The Growth Mindset of the participant had increase in how they felt about their own challenges and their impressions of others growth Mindset.
In the fourth participant pairing both participants started on a growth mindset. The participant being coached on the WOOP model only moved by one mark towards a slightly more growth mindset. The participant without the WOOP model did not move their marks at all.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 19 Our small study posed as many questions for us as answers. Whilst the coaching model used was seen to have some impact on teacher mindset, it has led us to question whether or not this is the most effective model to use. Further studies would allow us to identify other coaching models for use in school in order to ensure that we are maximising not only the exposure of staff to coaching, but also to select the right coaching model to support and develop each staff member appropriately.
Moving forward, our findings give us the opportunity to investigate further questions: Does an improved score in teacher mindset impact positively on student progress? Do teachers respond better to coaching or mentoring? Is the model of coaching more or less important than the personal relationship between the coach and coached? Does the mindset we begin with affect the impact of the WOOP model?
An Academy-wide QTLA (Quality of Teaching, Learning and Assessment) review, revised to include a greater focus on both research informed practice and the deepening of the coaching and mentoring programme, will provide all staff with further opportunities to explore some of these ideas.
References Character Lab (n.d.) WOOP-Toolokit for Educators Available at: https://cdn.characterlab.org/assets/WOOP-Toolkit- for-Educators-3398204c4454790514a0eefa234b896f9307a61872e6395f06067a7cfa8523ea.pdf [Accessed 20 October 2017]
Dweck, C.S., (2012) Mindset: How you can fulfill your potential. Edinburgh: Constable and Robinson.
Becky Williams chose to develop the study on mindset further and to submit it to the Teaching and Learning Academy for Accreditation. Below is an edited version of her submission.
20 Action Research Report DOES COACHING IMPROVE TEACHER MINDSET?
Becky Williams | Goodwin Academy | [email protected]
Research carried out by psychologist Carol Dweck (2012) from Stanford University explores mind-sets and how a person’s belief in themselves and their basic qualities can be argued to be fixed traits carved in stone or these beliefs can be cultivated throughout your one’s life.
Her research suggests that there are two types of mind-set: Fixed mind-sets and Growth mind sets. People with a fixed mind- set are perceived as having a set amount of intelligence and talent and nothing can change it. People who have a fixed mind- set often worry about their traits and how adequate they are, always looking to prove something to others. On the other hand, those with a growth mind-set foresee that their skills and qualities can be developed through working hard and effort and it takes years of practice and motivation in their learning.
In 2017, Eduarardo Bricefio reflected on how people perceive they are working as hard as they can but feel like they are not improving as fast as they should or even want to. In his discussion he presents the idea of the Performance Zone compared to that of the Learning Zone which shows correlation to that of people’s beliefs and their mind-set.
Both mind-set and learning zones give an accurate awareness in understanding how staff and students alike perceive themselves in achieving their desired success. For teaching staff over the past three years it has been necessary for them to work in the performance zone which has often led to a feeling that they are stuck and often an opinion that their intelligence is what they have and cannot be improved. For our children, they show high levels of low self-esteem believing that they are not intelligent and they should be able to do things easily, all traits of fixed mind-sets.
The Goodwin Academy was a school that was in special measures and took extensive action to mentor staff across the school to ensure all lessons offered a good classroom climate and learning for our young students and one which was enjoyable. Canterbury Christ Church University supported setting up and discussing the aims of this research project alongside other members of the Goodwin Academy who also are carrying out the project. Through discussion, the aims of the project will hope to gain evidence in order to support the research focus and determine comparisons within the research area identified. Working alongside Glynn Myers, Deborah Lowther, Malita Brown and with the guidance from William Stow of Canterbury Christ Church University mentoring throughout the project enabled me to develop my thinking and how to develop the research question:
“Does coaching improve teacher mindset?”
Staff at the Goodwin Academy have had training to develop methods of teaching in the classroom and personalised meetings to support their development through whole school mentoring and individual mentoring. The mentoring provided staff with strategies to improve classroom practices and development that often were part of teaching staff professional development targets.
Through setting up a research project that focuses on coaching rather than mentoring, the project aimed to provide coaching to develop a more positive mind-set and personalised goal-setting strategy for staff that could also affect students. Through being part of the research group it aimed to enhance and support productivity felt by teachers in lessons and support achieved outcomes of students from using the WOOP Toolkit for Educators (Wish, Outcome, Obstacle, Plan) which focuses on the volunteer’s perceived Wish for an area they want to change or make improvements in, rather than being directed to.
The use of coaching with a volunteer group showed that in a non-judgemental environment, where the volunteer is allowed to take risks and reflect on their own Wish for what they want to achieve, growth mind-set and the opportunity to work in the Learning Zone led to a sense of mutual accomplishment being made by both the teacher and students.
Through using the WOOP toolkit and offering the coaching sessions to the volunteer regularly, the initial Wish and ideas to support it were developed and then explored further when success was felt. Through reflection of the teacher, the Wish and obstacles and outcomes were altered to take further risks and opportunities within the selected class.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 21 Through the coaching programme the teacher felt that it supported how he perceived his mind-set as it gave him the opportunity to think properly about what he wanted from the classes he teaches. Rather than working in a performance zone, by continually using the WOOP toolkit programme in the coaching sessions he was able to take risks and adjust the WOOP for different classes and range of aims as they changed. This supported the individual child and group he was working with, enabling him to support the varying needs of the students at a range of levels.
Both teacher and students alike could identify the differences in attitude, belief and a recognition that improvements could be made to their learning and progress using alternative methods which in turn has given all parties a stronger resilience and thus creating improved motivation and productivity and most importantly an enhancement in their working relationship.
The Impact on Learning Through investigating whether coaching can improve teacher mind-set I have gained a deeper levels of understanding how mind set can help and support individuals in their daily lives. Carol Dweck’s (2012 ) work on Growth Mind-set has been of particular interest in schools. Through her studies, Carol Dweck has shown how enabling children to develop and become more resilient supports whole development and a continuation in their progress.
In setting up the research project I was particularly interested in the mind-set of teachers within Goodwin Academy and believe that if teachers feel they can move to a growth Mind-set and a culture where mistakes can be celebrated as a learning opportunity, this same feeling could reflect and really support the development both of our school environment and of our students.
References Bricefio, E. (2017) How to get better at the things you care about. Available at: https://www.ted.com/talks/ eduardo_briceno_how_to_get_better_at_the_things_you_care_about [Accessed 20 October 2017] Character Lab (n.d.) WOOP-Toolokit for Educators Available at: https://cdn.characterlab.org/assets/WOOP-Toolkit- for-Educators-3398204c4454790514a0eefa234b896f9307a61872e6395f06067a7cfa8523ea.pdf [Accessed 20 October 2017]
Dweck, C.S., (2012) Mindset: How you can fulfill your potential. Edinburgh: Constable and Robinson.
Mindset Online (n.d.) What is mindset https://mindsetonline.com/whatisit/about/ [Accessed 20 October 2017]
Mindset works (n.d.) Decades of Scientific Research that Started a Growth Mindset Revolution Available at: https:// www.mindsetworks.com/science/ [Accessed 20 October 2017]
22 Action Research Report WHAT DOES EFFECTIVE COACHING LOOK LIKE AT DOVER GRAMMAR SCHOOL FOR BOYS?
Dee Derrick, Catherine Gisby and Alan Smith | Dover Grammar School for Boys [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
This area was of interest to us as a school because coaching had taken place at Dover Grammar School for Boys (DGSB) previously but had limited success. When invited to take part in future coaching projects the staff as a whole seemed very reluctant and there was a 0% uptake of coaching as part of CPD. We wanted to find out why this might be and what we could do in order to change this.
We organised a focus group to investigate staff attitudes to coaching. Our findings varied from person to person but the general feeling was that compulsory coaching was not popular with staff members and in some cases had created a negative feeling towards the process of coaching. Issues with pairings had created a general feeling of vulnerability as if people were being judged on their performance.
However, unexpectedly lots of members of staff were still very open to the idea of trying coaching again but under different circumstances. Some of the ideas they put forward were
• making coaching optional • having topic specific coaching groups to fulfill a particular need • ensuring coaches were trained in the process.
Working as part of the research project allowed us to see the positive impacts of coaching at Astor College, a member of our collaborative family of schools, and a different model of support and investment.
Dee and Catherine have volunteered to become part of a coaching training scheme run by Astor College to enable them to become fully trained in the process of coaching. They would like to run a small scale coaching programme at DGSB taking on board the suggestions made in the focus group. This has been encouraged by the senior leadership as there is a strong belief in the school that coaching is worthwhile and positive for all members of staff.
Once training of coaches has taken place, volunteers will be asked to join the coaching programme. These volunteers will be given a questionnaire at the beginning and end of their experience to see how beneficial they found the coaching process. If this is something that seems to be having a positive impact for DGSB staff members then this will possibly be expanded upon.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 23 WHAT IMPACT DOES IRIS CONNECT HAVE ON A TEACHER’S PRACTICE?
Debbie Chapman and Kirsty Adams| St Edmund’s School | [email protected]
According to Lofthouse, Cummings, Hall, Leat and Towler (2010) video analysis remains a significantly underused resource in teacher coaching and needs urgent attention’ as a resource underused in our school we wanted to investigate if video had an impact on teacher reflections. In their report ‘Coaching: Revolution not Evolution’ it is stated that ‘where video is used well it allowed productive analysis of the relationship between what teachers did and how individuals or groups of students responded’. Therefore, we wanted to investigate whether recording and watching their own lesson improved teacher reflections.
As a school, we had recently invested in the IRIS Connect video software, which promised to improve teacher reflection. We wanted to investigate if this claim and monitor any impact recording lessons had on teacher reflection.
The aim of our research project was to gain evidence to provide an understanding as to whether the IRIS software will help to improve teacher’s ability to reflect and make participants more reflective practitioners. We hoped that using IRIS software would inspire more collaboration and sharing of ideas within school. Our research question was, therefore, “What impact does IRIS Connect have on a teacher’s practice?”
First, we invited a team from IRIS connect into school during a staff meeting to launch the software. This ensured that all members of staff received accurate information and were taught how to use IRIS Connect accurately. During this meeting, the team from IRIS Connect asked volunteers to trial IRIS and become a ‘trial group’. We volunteered so that we could use this data in our research project. The ideology behind the trial group was that they would use IRIS Connect first and promote this to the rest of the school.
Due to time constraints, we chose to focus on our own personal experiences of IRIS Connect for our research project. Therefore we would evaluate our own experiences.
Debbie decided to use IRIS Connect to see if it would improve her reflections. She gave herself baseline targets to improve on based on previous observations. She would focus on these targets, record her lessons using IRIS Connect then review and evaluate the impact. The measurable outcome would be to see if these targets for development were raised again in two weeks time in an observation.
Kirsty focused on the impact IRIS Connect had on Student teachers and whether reflecting on recorded lessons improved the quality of new teacher reflections and ultimately their teaching. She encouraged the two student teachers to use IRIS and feedback in weekly meetings. Kirsty measured the impact of IRIS Connect over a few months.
We both realised that IRIS Connect would not be the only factor influencing improving our reflections and teaching practice as we both had access to a variety of CPD in many forms therefore distinguishing the specific impact of IRIS Connect could be difficult. However, our own personal reflections when we are both using only IRIS could be an indication to its impact.
As a result of our research IRIS Connect became included in staff vocabulary. Teachers were asking each other in the staffroom if they has used IRIS. We both noticed that we were being sent IRIS Connect clips from other teachers’ lessons for feedback. This suggested that IRIS was being used and engaged with proactively by staff. This was an unforeseen positive impact of IRIS Connect.
Debbie discovered that when watching recorded lessons and reflecting, IRIS was very good at allowing her to spot small details, which she could easily rectify and focus on. Had she not had recorded lesson, this might not have been the case. Debbie’s observation was extremely positive and the areas that she was working on were identified as strengths in her observation. Therefore, IRIS Connect had a positive impact on her improving her reflections.
Kirsty identified an improvement in her student teachers. They began to recommend IRIS to PGCE student teachers who wanted to record their lessons and reflect using the software. The promotion of IRIS Connect by the student teachers suggests that they feel it improved their teacher reflection and practice.
24 Action Research Report We learnt that some staff still had reservations about using IRIS. They were not keen on recording lessons or convinced about the privacy of the software. Some staff had issues using and setting up IRIS Connect in their classrooms, which will need to be resolved in the future.
Finally, we learnt that when engaged with, IRIS Connect did seem to improve teachers’ reflections and therefore their practice. The biggest barrier was getting reluctant staff to use the software. Technology failure was also a big barrier which needs consideration to overcome.
Overall, we learnt that IRIS Connect allowed teachers to focus their reflections on specific details that they were able to develop. This would have a positive impact on their teaching as they could see for themselves the progress they were making through recording their lessons using IRIS Connect.
Looking forward, We will need to consider how we can ensure that the software works all the time so that staff are not frustrated or put off from using IRIS Connect. As IRIS Connect seemed to have a positive effect on teacher reflection and ultimately the teaching improved, we will consider ways to encourage all teaching staff. One of the questions is how could we incorporate IRIS into school policies and would it be viable?
We have dedicated a section of the Teaching and Learning newsletter to promote IRIS Connect and its positive benefits to all staff.
References IRIS Connect (n.d.) The video-based professional learning platform. Available at: https://www.irisconnect.com [Accessed September 2017]
Lofthouse, R., Cummings, C., Hall, E., Leat, D. & Towler, C. (2010) Improving Coaching: Evolution not revolution, Reading: CfBT Education Trust and the National College.
Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 25 Thanks to all the participants for their interesting research and to all the schools for their participation.
26 Action Research Report Researching the Impact of Effective Coaching and Mentoring in Schools 27 Faculty of Education Canterbury Christ Church University North Holmes Road | Canterbury | Kent CT1 1QU [email protected] www.canterbury.ac.uk/education